Commonwealth of Australia v Babic, Marco [1984] FCA 366

Commonwealth of Australia v Babic, Marco [1984] FCA 366

The payment made under the deed of release did not constitute acknowledgment by the Commonwealth of an obligation to make weekly payments beyond 31 August 1979, nor did it amount to weekly payments within clause 12. Even if it could be so characterized, the agreement embodied in the deed ended such payments at 31 August 1979. Therefore, clause 12 did not require ongoing weekly payments after that date, and Mr Babic must prove incapacity for any subsequent compensation award.

Parties
Appellant: Commonwealth of Australia; Respondent: Marko Babic
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 November 1984
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Compensation Payable, Deed of Release, Weekly Payments, Agreement Ending Payments
Workers' Compensation Compensation Payable Deed of Release Weekly Payments Agreement Ending Payments

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commonwealth of Australia

Appellant

Marko Babic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employer acknowledged an obligation to make weekly compensation payments so as to invoke clause 12 of the First Schedule to the Workmen's Compensation Ordinance 1951 (A.C.T.)
  2. 2 Whether any obligation to make weekly payments had been ended by agreement within the meaning of clause 12

Ratio Decidendi

The payment made under the deed of release did not constitute acknowledgment by the Commonwealth of an obligation to make weekly payments beyond 31 August 1979, nor did it amount to weekly payments within clause 12. Even if it could be so characterized, the agreement embodied in the deed ended such payments at 31 August 1979. Therefore, clause 12 did not require ongoing weekly payments after that date, and Mr Babic must prove incapacity for any subsequent compensation award.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The order of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory is set aside and in lieu thereof the appeal to that Court is dismissed with costs.